David A. Smith
McIntyre & Smith
Attorneys for Appellee
Jeffrey A. Modisett
Attorney General of Indiana
Christopher L. LaFuse
Deputy Attorney General
STATE OF INDIANA,
Appellee (Plaintiff below).
) Supreme Court No.
) Court of Appeals No.
In accordance with our decision today in State v. Mohler, No. 87S01-9709-PC-497 (Ind. May 6, 1998), we conclude that the new rule of law announced in Bryant v. State, 660 N.E.2d 290 (Ind. 1995), cert. denied, 117 S.Ct. 293 (1996), is not retroactive under Daniels
v. State, 561 N.E.2d 487 (Ind. 1990), and so does not entitle James E. Dunn to post-
In August, 1992, the State charged James E. Dunn ("Dunn") with possession of more
than thirty grams of marijuana, a class D felony.See footnote
In September, 1992, the Indiana
Department of Revenue issued Dunn a warrant for assessment and collection of a Controlled
Substance Excise Tax ("CSET").See footnote
Dunn pled guilty in October 1994 to the charge of
In January, 1996, Dunn filed a petition for post-conviction relief based on this Court's
decision in Bryant, 660 N.E.2d 290 (holding that because CSET is punishment, the Double
Jeopardy Clause bars drug prosecution after CSET has been assessed), which the post-
conviction court denied. Dunn appealed. In a memorandum decision, the Court of Appeals
reversed the post-conviction court's denial of relief, holding that the rule announced in
Bryant applied retroactively to Dunn. Dunn v. State, No. 47A04-9701-PC-20 (Ind. Ct. App.
Oct. 21, 1997).
Having granted transfer, we vacate the opinion of the Court of Appeals pursuant to
Ind.Appellate Rule 11(B)(3) and affirm the post-conviction court's denial of relief for the
reasons set forth in State v. Mohler, No. 87S01-9709-PC-497 (Ind. May 6, 1998), also
SHEPARD, C.J., and DICKSON, SELBY, and BOEHM, JJ., concur.
Converted from WP6.1 by the Access Indiana Information Network